Hot-button issues in the presidential race

This is the latest in a series of con-versations between the men who led New Jersey in the 1970s and 1980s, former Govs. Brendan Byrne and Thomas Kean. Long-time friends and tennis partners as well as political adversaries, the two remain active politically and professionally. Byrne is a partner in the law firm of Carella Byrne Bain Gilfillan Cecchi and Olstein. Kean is president of Drew University. In the following exchange, which took place recently at the Star-Ledger office in Newark, they discussed the Democrats’ prospects for recapturing control of Congress and debated which issues their respective parties will focus on in the upcoming congressional campaigns.

QUESTION: How do you rate the Democrats’ chances of taking back the House?

BYRNE: Of taking back the House? Princeton beat UCLA.

QUESTION: That much of a long shot?

BYRNE: Well, it came to mind.

KEAN: It depends very much on the top of the ticket. I think if the Democrats have a substantial win at the top of the ticket, they will take back the House.

BYRNE: Well, starting from what we know, and that’s New Jersey, do I see a big swing in the New Jersey delegation? It’s hard for me to see it, no matter what the top of the ticket does. I mean, we’ve got some excellent Democratic candidates, and we’re in the right, but they’re all uphill fights. I think a guy like Bill Pascrell is a great candidate, for instance. But do you think the Democrats are going to take Zimmer’s seat?

KEAN: I can see the Republicans taking Torricelli’s seat.

BYRNE: Oh, yes, it’s possible.

KEAN: But you’re right. You might have a few swings one way or another, but I don’t think enough to control the House. Unless the top of the ticket really swings, then that’s another story. You’ve got to remember that the mechanisms that helped House members to preserve incumbency under the Democrats is still in place. You still remember the guy who helped your aunt get Social Security back. Last election, you saw a swing in the national mood so severe as to cause a tidal wave that hit the Democrats and their Congress. That is very unusual in American history. For that to happen again, two years later, is possible, but very unlikely.

BYRNE: Another thing you ought to look at is that more Republicans maybe more Democrats, too but more Republicans vote in a presidential election. I remember Jim Howard used to walk away with the mid-term elections and have a real fight in the presidential year.

KEAN: I think there’s a reasonable assumption that the Republican Party has become the majority party in the country. They’re both down in the lower middle 30s, as a percentage of the electorate, but I think there are more Republicans now, and that’s a total change. Even though the parties’ numbers are lower, you can usually expand those percentages to the independents, since the independents often vote in the same ratio as the parties’ strength. The single-issue voters can alter the equation. But if people are confused, or they think, “Well, he’s right on this one, he’s right on that one,” then in the end they get what Millicent Fenwick used to describe as a kind of a feeling about a candidate, you know: “I think maybe he’s just a little better for me than the other fellow.” That’s who they usually end up voting for, and often it’s a close choice.

QUESTION: Isn’t there a problem with landslides? Grant, Nixon, Lyndon Johnson were all reversed in the next election. The other party came roaring back.

KEAN: Those were very close elections. I mean, Nixon lost to Kennedy by a very small margin.

QUESTION: The next time, in ’72, didn’t he clobber McGovern?

KEAN: Yes, but I think the nomination of McGovern was similar to the Republicans nominating somebody way on their right wing. He was not representative of the majority of Democrats in the country. He was much farther to the left, and Republicans were able to paint him that way in the election. The Democratic Party nominated people for a number of years that were to the left of the mainstream, and it wasn’t until they nominated Bill Clinton that they came back toward the center of the road.

BYRNE: I think your assessment of the ball game in certain areas is a perceptive one, especially that whether they are Republicans or Democrats doesn’t make a difference first, because you’ve got a huge independent bloc, and second, because elections aren’t won or lost by Republicans or Democrats. They’re won by candidates, candidates who raise their own money, who don’t have to worry about the strength and health of the party, candidates who get on television with their own message, and not particularly with the party message. I think the Contract with America was sort of unique, in that it gave the same message to a bunch of people. But that’s not the way elections normally go. Elections normally go with issues as defined by candidates. So if you’re saying if Clinton wins, does he get a Democratic House? No.

KEAN: No, but I think if Clinton wins substantially, he gets a Democratic House. I think it’s a question of degree.

BYRNE: No. If Clinton wins substantially, it means that the people are very unhappy with what this Congress has done.

KEAN: I mean that it depends on how the campaign goes. The only election in history that was determined in part by the Congress was ‘48, where Truman campaigned against the Congress. But, even there, most historians would say it was the totally lackluster campaign by Tom Dewey which lost that election.

BYRNE: The old saw was that everybody who knew Truman voted for Dewey and everybody who knew Dewey voted for Truman, and Dewey knew more people.

KEAN: Yes. I think the bottom line is that people vote between the two candidates, and those two candidates set the agenda for their parties. It’s very hard for a member of Congress to run outside that agenda. You can pick up marginal votes in a close district. If a Republican picks up votes from organized labor, because of certain votes and particular issues, it makes a marginal difference. If a Democrat can pick up law and order votes, it’s a marginal difference. But, in general, the top of the ticket sets the agenda.

BYRNE: Well, I think the Democrats are going to try to make Newt Gingrich an issue, and if Newt Gingrich is an issue, the Congress is an issue, and the record of Congress is an issue, and it may fly.

QUESTION: What three issues to do you think the Democrats should make the most of, and what three issues should the Republican candidate make the most of?

BYRNE: Okay, is taxation an issue? Yes. And the Democrats are going to be almost on the offensive part of that issue. In other words, they’re going to say “You’re going to reform the tax code to benefit the rich.” I think a huge issue is going to be what happens to all these people who get downsized and eliminated and need three jobs to make 10 percent of the money they were making on one job. And I think there’s a lot of things that emotionally are part of welfare reform which aren’t really welfare reform. I mean, welfare reform to a lot of people encompasses things like trade policy, even, and immigration, and it’s sort of a whole free- ride package.

KEAN: I think these things are all interrelated, but I think jobs, how you create them, how you preserve them, and what our job policy ought to be is probably number one. Tax reform is probably two. Whether or not you agree with the solutions, Forbes raised the right issue, and the public very strongly supports reform of the tax code. Third, welfare reform. And fourth, foreign policy. How important foreign policy is going to be as an issue depends on what’s going to happen in Bosnia, China, and the Middle East between now and the election. They’re all tinderboxes right now, and our foreign policy has not yet been successful in a number of those areas.

QUESTION: Can you see a situation where the Republicans can make the claim that they are more likely to create jobs, but the Democrats are apt to be believed in their claim that they are more likely to protect jobs?

KEAN: Yes. BYRNE: The Democrats are going to say they’re protecting jobs, but also they’re not sacrificing the environment in doing it, and I think the environment may be a strong contender for the top three.

KEAN: Well, the environment is always an issue in New Jersey. No question about that. I find, as I move out to some of the Western states, that environment is not so important. But it is definitely an issue in the Northeast and some other parts of the country.

QUESTION: Neither of you has mentioned character. Do you see that as an issue?

KEAN: It’s going to be. Character is always an issue, and may be the decisive issue in any presidential election in the end. People want to respect their president. Yes, people will make the decision on character, but I don’t think it’s going to be part of the debates. It’s going to be, again, a kind of a feeling people get about the various candidates.